Talk:Arcology
Deletion I agree with the proposal for deletion. This article quite literally serves no purpose. Justifying the existence of an article on Arcologies by w/ the fact that there are a couple in the game is like saying we should have an article on the Soviet Space Program since CCCP Luna 23 is in the game. SpartHawg948 07:14, 22 August 2009 (UTC) :I dunno what the policy on background articles like this is, but perhaps an exception should be made for science fiction or 'future science' concepts - the Soviet space programme is history - but the arcology is a big feature of the setting, mentioned on planetary surveys, and seen on Feros. Some people may have never encountered the concept before, or the concept of aerostat colonies, mentioned on a Prothean world. P.S. Wikipedia also has articles on things like point defense systems and railguns. Shell Kracker 12:49, 22 August 2009 (UTC) ::Re: arcologies: that's why making those point to a link to a Wikipedia page is probably best because explaining it in enough detail is beyond us. This page already has a link to that as a reference and the body of the article is relatively limited; why not point people to the Wikipedia page directly? ::We actually do have a page for FTL, but that's because space travel in Mass Effect has its own unique explanation and is directly relevant to both the story, technology and background of the ME universe. Arcologies, while interesting and worth giving people the Wikipedia link for, are not. --Tullis 12:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC) :::I'm just kinda used to the way Memory Alpha does things - Star Trek and Mass Effect are similar in that they both claim to represent the future, whereas Star Wars for example does not - and on Memory Alpha, if a concept like arcology was mentioned, or even just seen - it would probably get an article, so that people could see which episode. The stub would usually read something like 'Arcology, a type of blah blah, mentioned by XXXX in episode XXXX, and seen in the background of episode XXXX' So, I am not saying the article needs to explain arcologies in the depth that Wikipedia does, just that perhaps the planets they are present on should be mentioned. That way, the information is 'in-universe', and found nowhere else. I know some Wikis do see this as 'too minor', but not all. Shell Kracker 13:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC) ::::Well it's fine to have that mentioned on the planet pages themselves, but as Tullis has stated, this is a Mass Effect Wiki, not a Sci-Fi/Future Science wiki, so only Sci-Fi concepts that are somehow unique in ME need to have their own articles. If I had to point to one other wiki that ours emulates in any way, it wouldn't be Memory Alpha, it would be Wookiepedia. They have the same basic policy for this stuff- if it's not directly relevant, it doesn't have a page. We try to keep this one relevant and on topic. SpartHawg948 20:35, 22 August 2009 (UTC) :::::Instead of creating an article for every miscellaneous detail of Mass Effect, there could be one article with all the misc. information about the universe. That way short and non-relevant information could still be explained, but without piling irrelevant data on the wiki. --silverstrike 21:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC) ::::::But this is about the details of sciences and construction involved, like arcologies, that actually exist (or are theorised), and there is information on Wikipedia on them that is done far better than we could and is not specific to ME. For example: we have an article on dark energy, because that has a direct relevance to mass effect technology, and has a particular meaning within the ME universe. We have a link to W's dark energy page, but ours discusses it in the context of biotics. On the other hand, we don't have an article for the Stanford Torus. Instead, we link to its W page from Arcturus Station and the Citadel. ::::::In the end, we are talking about arcologies here. They are mentioned -- literally mentioned -- in the context of what a particular building is on Feros or Earth or wherever, in planet surveys, and that's it. If there was a specific arcology that was named and important, yes, we'd have an article on it. But we'd still likely just have a link to W from it that explains what an arcology is. This Codex entry is probably a better example of what I'm trying to get across. --Tullis 21:44, 22 August 2009 (UTC) :::::::Point taken. In that context, I guess that this page (and pages like this) could be removed from the wiki - my thought was regarding misc. information that visitors might be interested in understanding (I for one, did not know about this type of building). The reason I thought that this information could of stayed is because it explains about the universe (and I generally get lost on Wikipedia, and prefer to read a sentence, rather then full blown article). --silverstrike 21:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC) ::::::::If you lot want to remove the page, I have no objection; the only reason I wanted to explain to readers exactly what an arcology or aerostat colony is, was because Mass Effect is a very deep setting, that people unfamiliar with science fiction might not be able to spot every reference in. Most popular science fiction, in games, films, or TV, does not go into this kind of detail :-) Shell Kracker 23:38, 22 August 2009 (UTC) :::And that's a good reason to create a page, so thank you. : ) We can pop those links into planet articles with a minimum of bother. --Tullis 23:46, 22 August 2009 (UTC)